Volume 6, Issue 10, October – 2021
ISSN No:-2456-2165
Firm Specific Determinants in International Business
Symeon Mandrinos
Faculty of Business
Swinburne University of Technology, Sarawak, Malaysia
Abstract:- This study focuses on the context of Fast-
Moving Consumer Goods and Protected Designation of
origin firms, an area partially examined by a few
investigations in international business submissions. Our
study investigates small/medium and large firms to
gauge the efficacy of export determinants that influence
the export process of the Protected Designation of origin
firms. Using semi-structured in-depth interviews, we
explore a number of export firms in the European Union
Protected Designation of origin context. Results
demonstrate that Protected Designation firms' export
behavior is influenced by the Managerial,
Organisational, Product, and Finance export
determinants and play an important role in their
internationalisation process.
Keywords:- European Union; Fast Moving Consumer
Goods; Firm Specific Determinants; Protected Designation
of Origin.
I. INTRODUCTION
International business literature explains if research is
to have the potential to generate implications for both
academics and practitioners, first needs to gain a theoretical
understanding of the organisations are engaging
(Bonaccorsi, 1992, Casillas and Moreno-Menéndez M.,
2014, Tong et al., 2008). This leads to the need for more
theoretical understanding of the firm, the industry and the
key specific determinants of the country of operation
(Calantone et al., 2006, Cavusgil and Nevin, 1981,
Fetscherim, 2010, Gabrielsson et al., 2002, Holzmuller and
Kasper, 1991, Leonidou et al., 2013, Salomon and Jin,
2008).
When considering the existing literature, there are key
export determinants for a diverse range of firms, including
different factors, managerial, organisational, product,
strategy, and finance issues. All of these attract the attention
of SMEs or MNEs as key specific determinants. These
variations among firms reveal different attributes of export
behaviour (Buckley, 1990, Ho, 1992, Katsikeas, 1996,
Leonidou and Katsikeas, 1996, Welch, 1993, Whitelock,
2002), yet, at the same time, there is a shared resemblance,
as all types of firms want to be effective in solving
organisational and operational problems. This consideration
advances international business research into a new stream
of managerial, organisational, product and finance
interpretation.
IJISRT21OCT453 www.ijisrt.com
International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
Scholarly outcomes demonstrate the dominance of
managerial determinants like management extroversion
(Bartlett et al., 2013, Dimitratos et al., 2004, Leonidou et al.,
2007, Leonidou et al., 2002), and organisational factors,
such as knowledge, size and networks (Bonaccorsi, 1992,
Cohen and Levinthal, 1990, Hohenthala et al., 2014,
Leonidou et al., 2007, Madsen et al., 2012, Petersen et al.,
2008, Shinkle and Kriauciunas, 2010). In scholarly
outcomes, managerial and organisational determinants often
blend together and tend to overlap (Poulis and Poulis, 2011).
Likewise, the literature focuses on either the firm’s export
strategy for growth (Calantone et al., 2006, Hagena et al.,
2012, Sarkar et al., 1999) or on non-export strategies where
firms see more opportunities domestically (Crick, 2004); or
on whether a high level of product diversification in the
home market inhibits foreign growth (Kumar et al., 2012).
Finally, there is the element of financial gain or constrain
(Bilkey, 1982, Bell et al., 2012, Dau, 2013, Hope et al.,
2011) where profitable foreign opportunities stimulate
exports (Czinkota, 1994, Madura, 2012) as profit is a firm’s
primary incentive to expose itself to longstanding risk
(Jordan, 2012).
This study focuses on the context of Fast Moving
Consumer Goods (FMCG), protected designation of origin
products (PDO), an area which a few investigations have
partially examined in international business submissions
(Knight et al., 2007, Poulis et al., 2011). It appears there is a
paucity of research regarding the determinants that explain
the export processes of these type of firms, and any
scholarly propositions emerging are still in their infancy.
Our investigation takes into account both small/medium
SMEs and large firms to gauge the efficacy of the
determinants. Hence, the central research question that we
seek to explore in this paper is as follows:
RQ: What are the firm’s key determinants that influence the
export process of FMCGs (PDOs)?
This paper aims to make an essential contribution to
the international business export practices in the FMCG
context can only be explained through multi-paradigmatic
logic. Our investigation is cross-functional and provides a
descriptive model, facilitating a comprehensive
understanding of the relationship between firms’ internal
factors. The remainder of the paper is organised as follows:
we first present the theoretical background, and then
describe the methodological part of the study. Afterward, we
provide evidence of the firm-specific determinants in the
findings section. We then focus on the discussion, where we
integrate our findings with existing literature. In the final
section, we examine the study’s limitations.
417
Volume 6, Issue 10, October – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
II. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
A. Managerial/Organisational
In examining the role of managerial factors, we define
management as encompassing people with high status in
organisations (Welch et al., 2002), who possesses
characteristics including motivation features, export
orientation, risk perception (Bartlett et al., 2013, Katsikeas
and Piercy, 1993, Leonidou et al., 2002). Management
possess the knowledge skills and experience (Onetti et al.,
2012, Pla-Barber and Alegre, 2014) all contribute to smooth
exporting. This shows that managers discover export
opportunities because of their market knowledge, while on
the other hand not all size of organisations can to see, pursue
and accomplish exports, as some remain reluctant to
internationalise intentionally due to their management
shortcomings for example, risk aversion (Brouthers et al.,
2009, Knight and Cavusgil, 2004). Similarly, size is an
important (Li et al., 2013) but also an independent
determinant for foreign expansion (Brouthers et al., 2009,
Cavusgil, 1984, Evers and Knight, 2008, Katsikeas and
Morgan, 1994). Hence, empirical studies that explore the
relationship between size and exports provide mixed results
(Kirca et al., 2012).
B. Product
Scholars propose that product credentials are
embedded within the firm that manufactures them
(Leonidou et al., 2002, Leonidou et al., 2007). In particular,
the nature of a quality product, in its original form, is
important within economic discourses, as when they are
choosing higher quality, market buyers are likely to pay a
price premium. However, quality is a complex feature,
overlaps with price, and cannot exclusively maintain a
firm’s successful export processes (Lages et al., 2009).
Likewise, even though price can signal quality (Ingenbleek
and Van der Lans, 2013), price is a multifaceted issue;
product prices interact with those of the competition,
including external substitute brands generating a market
price war between quality products. This causes instability
and the firms’ impact and export continuity cannot be
guaranteed.
Products are also embedded within and determined by
the market. Products are separated as branded or private
labelled goods (PL), and the two product types are fierce
competitors in the FMCG sector (Lamey et al., 2012).
Private labeled products aim to deliver value–for-money or
a low price strategy (Lages et al., 2009, Verhoef et al., 2000)
counter to the branded or designation origin products in the
market. Essentially these products require marketing support
to leverage their export incentives (Cavusgil et al., 1993,
Czinkota and Ronkainen, 2007, Leonidou et al., 2007,
Sanchez and McKinley, 1995, Style and Ambler, 1994).
C. Finance
When firms are efficient enough to absorb costs over
time, they can improve their marginal profitability and
trigger exports (Dau, 2013, Jordan, 2012). Bilkey and
Warren (1982) suggest that a typical problem emerges for
many firms when their export volume represents a low
IJISRT21OCT453 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
percentage of total sales even though they have good export
potential and years of experience. This situation creates a
lack of consistency between their financial capacity,
profitability and exports. Furthermore, Bell et al. (2012)
argue that the accelerating pace of international market
integration has a profound impact on the strategies of firms
accessing financial resources. When they internationalise,
firms tend to experience a higher cost of capital and lower
liquidity than rivalry (host firms). Hence, a company’s
intention to internationalise might be constrained as while
they may be selling products and services these firms might
also in parallel raise their levels of financial debt.
Contrariwise, firms’ resources and capabilities can improve
the potential benefits reforming their profitability (Dau,
2013). Dau (2013) proposes that the international market’s
price liberalisation allows the forces of supply and demand
to set the price for goods and services, increasing the
opportunities for firms to augment profitability.
III. METHODOLOGY
In our investigated context we follow the qualitative
realism paradigm where reality is not generalized through
statistical methods (Bryman, 2012, Patton, 1990). In our
context we apply a case study approach. Our study cross-
examines a series of semi-structured in-depth interviews.
Initially we employed a pilot study with interviews chosen
from a secondary database, the Hellenic Milk Organisation.
The representatives were typically two Owners, two Export
Managers one Export Agent and one Sales Director. A
respectful number of medium and large firms from the
Hellenic Milk Organisation database were chosen for the
main study. Initially thirteen firms showed an interest in
participating but only nine finally decided to respond. We
conducted interviews with one Owner, eleven Export
Managers/Directors, six Export Area Managers, three
Export Assistants and one Marketing Manager.
Additionally, three interviewees from two cases are general
managers of subsidiaries in foreign countries (USA-
Romania-Bulgaria).
We employed the Mega Matrix technique; according
to Miles and Huberman (1994) despite being a heavy-duty
method, matrices help to understand the flow, location and
connection of events; it is also good for exploratory
eyeballing, ending itself to a greater causal clarification.
Analysis was made on a case-by-case basis. The coding
procedure and data reduction offered us rich and
manageable insights where thoughts are translated into
codes and data is broken down into smaller parts (Miles and
Huberman, 1994, Yin, 2009). Furthermore, we use multiple
sources of evidence to increase our results credibility and
validate them. Internal validity is supported by a careful
literature review and by deriving the conceptual
categorization from the current literature. Our study it is
further supported with data triangulation (interviews,
secondary data and the data analysis process). We use this
triangulation method to validate results we acquire from
different sources.
418
Volume 6, Issue 10, October – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
IV. FINDINGS
Our findings demonstrate many contradictory results.
For instance, the management within FMCG protected
designation of origin firms’ exhibit an extroverted behaviour
in particular with regard to European Union countries.
Case9“…what I saw previously and now more
intensively is that if you won’t expand abroad you will
eventually die, since the market now is what we call the
European Union, a large market and you cannot be restricted
only to a small part of it” (Export Director).
However, the European market harbors difficulties and
barriers for managers seeking to approach the right
collaborators.
Case5“…unfortunately the European market currently
ignores the quality issue a lot. Is more interested in […]
price and because […] prices of ‘feta’ is not very
competitive compare to other distributed products, this is
where the difficulty exists” (Export Area Manager).
Extraversion and optimism stimulation is plausible.
Case8“...the main motivation I believe is the increase
in profitability which mainly concerns the businessman”
(Export Manager).
Case3“…take for example India! As an export
manager my first priority is the turnover, and to sell as much
as I can. Of course, the second priority for me is the firm’s
presence abroad and to continue opening new foreign
destinations. But somehow you should counterbalance these
two and you understand when you have to sell and produce
profits for the company then you choose this and after the
other” (Export Manager).
But exports are frequently overshadowed by
managers’ behaviour.
Case1“...they don’t have the knowledge; they do not
have time to engage themselves [....] The businessman is
occupied with everyone and everything, and does not have
the time to deal with exports” (Owner).
Case8“…most companies in Greece operate
opportunistically [...] most Greek companies’ regardless of
sizes, are distinguished by an introvert […] because they are
small/medium family businesses that prefer to give part of
the business from the father to the child or grandchildren or
I do not know to whom, without meritocracy” (Export Area
Manager).
On the one hand utilizing export knowledge, managers
try to adapt to new market circumstances.
Case5“…I think knowledge is more than satisfactory
because (the firm) has operated for nearly 30 years.
Experience is present at different stages chronologically
with different effects in the firm […] of course changes exist
every day in many things but we try, and knowledge enables
us more easily to adapt to new situations […] Putting all
IJISRT21OCT453 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
these in a basket at some point you get one plus and one
minus, and a decision whether to proceed or not” (Export
Area Manager).
On the other hand, although knowledge relies on
accurate information, managers have limited export
information and this result in knowledge gap and uncritical
export behaviour.
Case8“…and I think that only has a negative effect.
Empirical knowledge is knowledge that every cheese maker,
let’s say cheese maker, because I do not think in Greece
there are many companies, cheese production companies.
There are cheese makers, and small medium and large
cheese production units. The empirical knowledge that all
usually possess, gathered over the last 10-20-30 years from
the Greek market, influences negatively the way they
connect their external market activities because they try first
to see if they can bring foreign partners in to the habits
(custom/practice) of Greeks, and when this fails they try to
see if they can adapt their knowledge without changing
anything in essence from these habits. So, I think empirical
knowledge affects. Greek companies are not easily
adaptable to what the foreign markets really require”
(Export Manager).
This behaviour increases export risk, and creates
erroneous market inferences while procrastinating
internationalisation.
Case7“…I would say at this stage it is the fear of
payment, the uncertainty of the future, not knowing the
situations, and how each market operates, and more on the
company’s culture being not willing to enter into new
territories and things we do not know” (Export Area
Manager).
Case2“...there is a demand (market) but we do not
want to go there because we believe that these are easy
markets [...] our company to enter in the Balkan area and
Albania is very easy to perform exports, but the question is
who bears the risk and how easily (our products) can be
copied by the domestic rivalry” (Export Economic
Director).
Managers claim the firm’s size is a key determinant
either for success or failure.
Case5“…size definitely affects, in what sense! For
instance, it depends on which country you want to export. It
depends on who are your customers and what they need. If
you are a small firm definitely the clientele you address will
not be a large S/M […] the size definitely affects the
contacts abroad; the foreign relations you have; the clientele
you have and of course […] the size affects the price you
can offer” (Export Area Manager).
Case8“…a medium-sized feta production unit in
Greece cannot meet the demand of more than two or three
customers, retailers in one country […] a medium-sized
supermarket chain in central Europe requires 500 tonnes of
feta annually. A medium-sized Greek feta production unit
419
Volume 6, Issue 10, October – 2021
produces 1000 to 1500 tonnes. Practically, that is two to
three key accounts […] Can someone say that size does not
affect our export performance? He cannot. If a company is
small or medium size, it can meet the needs of only one
client, therefore, with what export expectations?” (Export
Manager).
Counter to the above, size is considered less important
to HORECA channel markets.
Case9“Many small and medium cheese makers have
export activity since the export path is open to everyone.
Which path, the path of a Greek wholesaler abroad
distributing in 100km radius and serving 100-200 Greek
restaurants; this path. Is not the path, let’s say of the
supermarkets shelf that directly communicates with the
consumers; it is not the same competitive path when you
place your product on the shelf” (Export Consultant-General
Director).
With regard to brand and PL our findings show
products are sold with private label and not branded.
Case2“…a big part of Greek feta is exported as PL,
and as PL the businessman has no longer from there to do
anything else apart from giving the lowest possible price to
enter into a supermarket chain. Neither to communicate nor
to advertise the product or anything else; you understand?
So this is the reason why we sell and large companies sell
big quantities” (Export Manager).
Findings also demonstrate a hidden mechanism
substantiating the fact that product and market differences
are neither black and white nor lukewarm.
Case8“…when we say private label as a producer, I
claim that I have my name there, and as I can tell you I
export my own brand, one in Germany and one in Italy, I
have my own brand and the world knows me as feta ‘Case8’
that in reality I distribute in Germany. Actually, I am hiding
behind a second discussion, where my own brand I used,
since the stakeholder, the retailer, did not want to put its
own information in the product as it does not interest him
much, and will not deal too much with it but he wanted to
put the producer’s name to bear full responsibility for
everything and the producer with the commitment that this
logo will not be sold anywhere else in the market.
Therefore, for me I can sell it as a brand in our discussion,
but in practice it is a private label for the retailer. You
understand what I mean? This means that in the market
there are many different names that typically belong to
Greek producers, however, the distributors and S/M
accounts manage them as private labels. That is how
products are sold; there is no branded recognition although
many brands are known with names of large Greek
producers. The large majority of the products, the large
quantity is sold as private labels” (Export Manager).
Price is a controversial factor.
Case1“…we cannot sell because we come out (in the
market) with a double price. A double price not because we
IJISRT21OCT453 www.ijisrt.com
International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
earn double but because we have double cost” (Export
Director).
Case4“…in Greece there are many small producers of
‘feta’ […] and (between producers) there cannot exist a
central price agreement and everyone according the needs
he has, he sells the product. This ends to with as large price
difference in feta” (Export Director).
Frequently, firms caught in cannibalizing domestic
competition with an ‘as it pleases’ price strategy.
Case5“…we hit each other purely with price […] the
biggest problem is really the unfair competition among
Greek producers who while everyone wants to do exports at
the same time everybody is looking to export where the firm
next to them exports, and whilst there is a free market, at the
same time, firms are trying to go and damage their
neighbors. This is the Greek mentality” (Export Manager).
Case3“…is set up on the wrong basis since their first
concern is price and not the consistent quality and brand
name of the product because there are many companies,
many small cheese production units, or rather small and
medium size units that operate only with private label
products abroad and mainly focus on low price” (Export
Manager).
Firms may become business-friendly due to financial
providers, yet this is considered as a risky commitment.
Case9“…feta producers obligatory end in banks.
Why? Because firms produce ‘feta’ for four months, and
then have to sell the product for the rest of the year. Product
produced for four months has to be paid. Similarly, the raw
material you collect in four months has to be paid. You pay,
store the product in your warehouse and you wait to sell. It’s
obvious, without financial support you cannot stand in this
arena. If someone buys product the whole year, and sells all
the year, you are obliged to ask money from financial
institutions. Since you produce 4 months you take all your
raw material in 4 months, make it a product and then you try
to store it in your warehouse to live for the rest of the year
i.e. to liquidate and return your cash flow to pay your
producer, for the next season” (Export Consultant/ General
Director).
Firms improve their capital reserves through the
implementation of better foreign market procedures and
payment conditions.
Case7“…procedures are more convenient for a
company before starting to load (the product) receiving its
money on its bank account. Even large retailers have a very
short payback time of our products. This was mainly the
reason why we arrange (exports) abroad and from there
many benefits are generated for the company” (Marketing
Manager).
Case1“…previously we sent first and then we get paid;
we lost lots of money and if we wanted to take it back with
420
Volume 6, Issue 10, October – 2021
lawyers and everything, we had to spend more money to get
back those we lost. As a result, we abandoned the idea and
now we say, you pay and you get” (Owner)
Because of foreign competition, small and medium
firms suffer from liability of foreignness as firms finances
are impinged and management experience economic
constraints due to liability of smallness.
Case9“…freeze capital, withheld by the Greek
government. It happens and it is a very important inhibiting
parameter of any export activity. These things should not
have happened. Value Added Tax must be paid on time
within the next 20 days. This is what happens in every
European country today. In Greece, VAT is returned after 5-
6 months and after a lot of effort, and after numerous checks
being done by the internal revenue service and many times
after under-the-table transactions with revenuers” (Export
Consultant/General Director).
Case7“…for instance, in other countries, the local
competition, they label their products feta without being a
PDO. For instance, in America every producer in
Wisconsin, the largest area producer per capita worldwide,
every white cheese is called ‘feta’. How Greeks can
compete with those producers […] the same stands for many
other countries in the world. Local producers generally have
the advantage mainly due to price and due to networks that
Greek enterprises do not possess” (USA Market Director).
V. DISCUSSION REMARKS
The arguments above encourage the development of a
descriptive framework, outlining the issues the FMCG
protected designation of origin firms need to investigate.
Having identified from our data the representative codes, the
next stage is to interpret findings in the light of an existing
literature.
Table 1 Conceptual framework
Initially, managerial factors demonstrate how
extraversion and optimism can be viewed as the result of a
learning process (Manev and Stevenson, 2001) whereby the
export orientation of firms is formed by the physical
market’s environment (Leonidou, 2003, Reid, 1981).
However, while it may seem certain that firms’ extraversion
IJISRT21OCT453 www.ijisrt.com
International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
and optimism is taught and developed, there are a lot of
exceptions to the rule. Contrary to what the managers
advocate, any optimistic stance may be frequently
overshadowed by negative export motivation (Chang et al.,
2012, Johnson et al., 2008). As a consequence, firms’
internationalization processes could be postponed as with
the lapsing of time, past decisions can affect future potential
(Casillas and Moreno-Menéndez M., 2014).
There are ongoing controversies concerning how
export knowledge eliminates negative cognition (Johanson
and Vahlne, 2009, Katsikeas, 1996, Pla-Barber and Alegre,
2014). Knowledge relies on accurate information, whereas
limited information can in fact lead to a knowledge gap,
uncritical behaviour and ignorance (Alvesson, 2011,
Petersen et al., 2008). Thus, although knowledge in our
cases appear to exist in relation to many aspects of the
business, knowledge is limited and passive according to the
idiosyncratic behaviour of firms (Day and Wensley, 1988).
All firms can be export-motivated, because they are
motivated by common factors including core production
competencies, additional sales, financial gain, and export
growth. In the PDO case, the internationalisation process is
heavily influenced by the ‘heredity’ factor of the firms’ size.
This finding contradicts with previous non-IB literature
outcomes which describes PDO certification as more
attractive to small and medium-sized firms (Bouamra,
2010, Profeta et al., 2010).
The export reputation of firms increases due to the
PDO ‘signal’ of trustworthiness and quality assurance, and
yet exports are concentrated on EU privileged countries’ and
on food retail ‘supertankers’ with PL orientations (Jang and
Olson, 2010). In one respect, designated products by default,
due to their unique nature and definition have an exotic and
organic character (E.C, 2012) and therefore, the liability of
foreignness may decrease, due to EU official recognition
and the consumers’ trust in the product. On the other hand,
the PL element is a crucial element of the transaction. This
research shows that different mechanisms are coming in to
play and filling the gap of the aforementioned area. Our
findings rest on the notion that PL does not necessarily
mean that products are labeled with the logo of key
accounts, or other distribution channels. Occasionally
designated products are sold branded, to European key
accounts without main interests, and with sales expectations
to coincide between the buyer and the seller. Retailers do
not want to incur the negative reactions of the market;
instead, retailers request a complete market commitment
from export firms. That is, the exporter cannot sell the PDO
elsewhere in the region within which the specific retailer
operates. Therefore, designation of origin products is sold as
branded goods, but practically considered as PL within the
retail marketers.
In terms of the corporate finance determinant, scholars
agree that insufficient financial gain discourages firms from
embarking on an internationalisation process (Leonidou,
2004, Evans et al., 2008). Scott (1995) proposes that
institutional factors affect firms’ practices such as financial
421
 Volume 6, Issue 10, October – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
holdings. Due to cash retention procedures these types of
practices raise uncertainty in transactions (Al-Najjar, 2013).
The value added tax percentage that firms pay in the
domestic home market is retained by the state for a five to
six months period. The State fails to provide export and
domestic rebates on time (Tuan, 2003) and rebates are only
returned after a plethora of bureaucratic obstacles, that
companies are required to overcome. This situation causes
the retention of capital inflow, inhibits the export process
and results in managers being unable to hold cash to
minimize financial distress or invest in projects; thus, firms
suffer from a ‘retrogressive nature’ in export development.
VI. LIMITATIONS - DIRECTION FOR FURTHER
RESEARCH
The core purpose of this study is to identify the firms’
key factors that are practical and engaged explicitly with the
FMCG PDO industry and play a defining role. Research
avenues would benefit from a further investigation, which
was not the focus of this study. However, we could not
conclude this article without mentioning this study is subject
to limitations. As with any qualitative research, we cannot
ensure the complete transferability of findings. The findings
of this paper are focused on the specific context of
designation of origin firms; it was not feasible to address all
the gaps within the case of investigation, and consequently
there is a limitation with regard to the choice of factors that
were analyzed, as there are other anecdotal components
which are also relevant. Furthermore, it was impossible to
substantiate if the aforementioned findings can be applicable
to other types of firms. Therefore, the extent to which the
results are transferable remains unclear. Scholars should
conduct further research in order to substantiate if findings
can be applicable to other type of firms or whether other
gaps can be defined and explored. Additionally, the
relatively small number of cases in one country, namely
Greece, limits our ability to generalize our findings. These
issues need to be examined in more detail by scholars in the
future.
This study lays the foundation for further research
examining the perception of FMCG firms concerning the
specific determinants they encounter in other countries.
Further study would enable a more solid understanding from
cross-country comparisons of the export knowledge relating
to FMCG products. Future areas of research can be derived
from this investigation because firms’ specific factors can
address and build a better cognitive understanding of
internationalisation. This study makes an important
contribution to fill the gap in previous international business
literature, and therefore, may stimulate academics and
practitioners to develop research further.
REFERENCES
[1]. AL-NAJJAR, B. 2013. The financial determinants of
corporate cash holdings: Evidence from some
emerging markets. International Business Review, 22,
77-88.
IJISRT21OCT453 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
[2]. ALVESSON, M. 2011. De-Essentializing the
Knowledge Intensive Firm: Reflections on Sceptical
Research Going against the Mainstream. Journal of
Management Studies 48:7 November 2011, 48, 1640-
1661.
[3]. BARTLETT, C., DOZ, Y. & HEDLUND, G. 2013.
Managing the Global Firm, Routeledge Library
Editions.
[4]. BELL, R., GREG, FILATOTCHEV, I. & RASHEED,
A., ABDUL. 2012. The liability of foreignness in
capital markets: Sources and remedies. Journal of
International Business Studies, 43, 107–122.
[5]. BILKEY, J., WARREN. 1982. Variables Associated
with Export Profitability. Journal of International
Business Studies, 13, 39-55.
[6]. BONACCORSI, A. 1992. On the Relationship
between Firm Size and Export Intensity. Journal of
International Business Studies, 23, 605-635.
[7]. BOUAMRA, Z., MECHEMACHE; CHAABAN,
JAD. 2010. Determinants of Adoption of Protected
Designation of Origin Label: Evidence from the
French Brie Cheese Industry. Journal of Agricultural
Economics, 61, 225-239.
[8]. BROUTHERS, E., LANCE; , GEORGE;, N.,
HADJIMARCOU, J. & BROUTHERS, D., KEITH.
2009. "Key Factors for Successful Export Performance
for Small Firms" Journal of International Marketing,
17, 21-38.
[9]. BRYMAN, A. 2012. Social Research Methods, New
York, Oxford University Press.
[10]. BUCKLEY, J., PETER. 1990. Problems and
Developments in the Core Theory of International
Business. Journal of International Business Studies,
21, 657-665.
[11]. CALANTONE, J., ROGER; , DAEKWAN, K. &
CAVUSGIL, S., TAMER. 2006. The influence of
internal and external firm factors on international
product adaptation strategy and export performance: A
three-country comparison. Journal of Business
Research, 59, 176-185.
[12]. CASILLAS, C., JOSÉ; & MORENO-MENÉNDEZ
M., A. 2014. Speed of the internationalization process:
The role of diversity and depth in experiential
learning. Journal of International Business Studies, 45,
85-101.
[13]. CAVUSGIL, S., TAMER; , ZOU, S. & NAIDU, G.,
M. 1993. Product and promotion adaptation in export
ventures: and empirical investigation. Journal of
international business studies, 24, 479-506.
[14]. CAVUSGIL, S., TAMER. 1984. Differences Among
Exporting Firms Based on Their Degree of
Internationalization. Journal of Business Research, 12,
195-208.
[15]. CAVUSGIL, T. & NEVIN, R., JOHN. 1981. Internal
Determinants of Export Marketing Behavior: An
Empirical Investigation. Journal of Marketing
Research, 18, 114-119.
[16]. CHANG, C.-H., FERRIS, D., LANCE;, JOHNSON,
E., RUSSELL; & ROSEN, C., CHRISTOPHER. 2012.
Core Self-Evaluations: A Review and Evaluation of
the Literature. Journal of Management, 38, 81-128.
422
Volume 6, Issue 10, October – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
[17]. COHEN, M., WESLEY; & LEVINTHAL, A.,
DANIEL. 1990. Absorptive Capacity: A new
perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 35, 128-152.
[18]. CRICK, D. 2004. U.K. SMEs decision to discontinue
exporting: an explanatory investigation into practices
within the clothing industry. Journal of Business
Venturing, 19, 561-587.
[19]. CZINKOTA, R., MICHAEL; & RONKAINEN, A.,
IIKKA. 2007. International Marketing, Mason OH,
Thomson South Western.
[20]. CZINKOTA, R., MICHAEL. 1994. "Executive
Insights: A National Export Assistance Policy for New
and Growing Businesses". Journal of International
Marketing, 2, 91-101.
[21]. DAU, L., ALFONSO. 2013. Learning across
geographic space: Pro-market reforms,
multinationalization strategy, and profitability. Journal
of International Business Studies, 44, 235-262.
[22]. DAY, S., GEORGE; & WENSLEY, R. 1988.
"Assessing Advantage: A Framework for Diagnosing
Competitive Superiority". Journal of Marketing, 52, 1-
20.
[23]. DIMITRATOS, P., LIOUKAS, S. & SARA, C. 2004.
An analytical review of the factors stimulating smaller
firms to export: Implications for policy-makers.
International Business Review 13, 19-41.
[24]. E.C 2012. Value of production of agricultural products
and foodstuffs, wines, aromatised wines and spirits
protected by a geographical indication (GI). Brussels.
[25]. EVANS, J., MAVONDO, F. & BRIDSON, K. 2008.
Psychic distance: Antecedents, retail strategy
implications, and performance outcomes. . Journal of
International Marketing, 16, 32-63.
[26]. EVERS, N. & KNIGHT, J. 2008. Role of international
trade shows in small firm internationalization: a
network perspective. International Marketing Review,
25, 544-562.
[27]. FETSCHERIM, M. 2010. "The determinants and
measurement of a country brand: the country brand
strength index". International Marketing Review, 27,
466-479.
[28]. GABRIELSSON, M., KIRPALANI, H., MANEK; &
LUOSTARINEN, R. 2002. Multiple Channel
Strategies in the European Personal Computer
Industry. Journal of International Marketing, 10, 73-
95.
[29]. HAGENA, B., ZUCCHELLA, A., CERCHIELLO, P.
& DE-GIOVANNI, N. 2012. International strategy
and performance—Clustering strategic types of SMEs.
International Business Review 21, 369-382.
[30]. HO, F., LAU. 1992. Internationalisation,
internalisation, or a New Theory for Small, Low
technology Multinational Enterprise? European
journal of Marketing, 26, 17-31.
[31]. HOHENTHALA, J., JOHANSON, J. & JOHANSON,
M. 2014. Network knowledge and business-
relationship value in the foreign market. International
Business Review, 23, 4-19.
IJISRT21OCT453 www.ijisrt.com
ISSN No:-2456-2165
[32]. HOLZMULLER, H., HARTMUT; & KASPER, H.
1991. On a theory of export performance: personal and
organisational determinants of export trade activities
observed in small and medium sized firms.
Management International Review, 31, 45-70.
[33]. HOPE, O.-K., WAYNE, T. & VYAS, D. 2011.
Financial credibility, ownership, and financing
constraints in private firms. Journal of International
Business Studies, 42, 935–957.
[34]. INGENBLEEK, P. & VAN DER LANS, I. 2013.
Relating price strategies and price-setting practices.
European Journal of Marketing, 47, 27-48.
[35]. JANG, J. & OLSON, F. 2010. The role of product
differentiation for contract choice in the agro-food
sector. European Review of Agricultural Economics.,
37, 251-273.
[36]. JOHANSON, J. & VAHLNE, J., ERIK. 2009. The
Uppsala internationalization process model revisited:
From liability of foreignness to liability of
outsidership. Journal of International Business
Studies, 40, 1411–1431.
[37]. JOHNSON, E., RUSSELL;, ROSEN, C.,
CHRISTOPHER; & LEVY, E., PAUL. 2008. Getting
to the Core of Core Self-Evaluation: A Review and
Recommendations. Journal of Organisational
Behavior, 29, 391-413.
[38]. JORDAN, J., STEVEN 2012. Time-varying risk and
long-term reversals: A re-examination of the
international evidence. Journal of International
Business Studies, 43, 123-142.
[39]. KATSIKEAS, S., CONSTANTINE; & MORGAN,
E., ROBERT. 1994. Differences in Perceptions of
Exporting Problems Based on Firm Size and Export
Market Experience. European Journal of Marketing,
28, 17-35.
[40]. KATSIKEAS, S., CONSTANTINE; & PIERCY, F.,
NIGEL. 1993. Long-Term Export Stimuli and Firm
Characteristics in a European LDC. Journal of
International Marketing, 1, 23-47.
[41]. KATSIKEAS, S., CONSTANTINE. 1996. Ongoing
export motivation: differences between regular and
sporadic exporters. International Marketing Review,
13, 4-19.
[42]. KIRCA, H., AHME;, HULT, M., TOMAS;,
DELIGONUL, S., PERRYY, Z., MORYS; &
CAVUSGIL, S., TAMER. 2012. A Multilevel
Examination of the Drivers of Firm Multinationality:
A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Management, 38, 502-
530.
[43]. KNIGHT, A., GARY; & CAVUSGIL, S., TAMAR.
2004. Innovation, Organizational Capabilities, and the
Born-Global Firm. Journal of International Business
Studies, 35, 124-141.
[44]. KNIGHT, G., JOHN;, HOLDSWORTH, K., DAVID;
& MATHER, W., DAMIEN. 2007. Country-of-origin
and choice of food imports: an in-depth study of
European distribution channel gatekeepers. Journal of
International business studies, 38, 107-125.
423
Volume 6, Issue 10, October – 2021
[45]. KUMAR, V., GAUR, S., AJAI; & PATTNAIK, C.
2012. Product Diversification andI nternational
Expansion of Business Groups. Management
International Review, 52, 175-192.
[46]. LAGES, L., FILIPE; , SILVA, G. & STYLES, C.
2009. "Relationship Capabilities, Quality, and
Innovation as Determinants of Export Performance".
Journal of International Marketing, 17, 47-70.
[47]. LAMEY, L., DELEERSNYDER, B., STEENKAMP,
J.-B. & DEKIMPE, M. 2012. The Effect of Business-
Cycle Fluctuations on Private-Label Share: What Has
Marketing Conduct Got to Do with It? Journal of
Marketing, 76, 1-19.
[48]. LEONIDOU, C., LEONIDAS 2003. "VIEWPOINT
Overcoming the limits of exporting research using the
relational paradigm". International Marketing Review,
20, 129-141.
[49]. LEONIDOU, C., LEONIDAS; , KATSIKEAS, S.,
CONSTANTINE; & SAEEM, S. 2002. Marketing
strategy determinants of export performance: A meta-
analysis. Journal of Business Research, 55, 52-67.
[50]. LEONIDOU, C., LEONIDAS; & KATSIKEAS, S.,
CONSTANTINE. 1996. The export development
process: an intergrative review of empirical models.
Journal of International Business Studies 27, 517-551.
[51]. LEONIDOU, C., LEONIDAS;, KATSIKEAS, S.,
CONSTANTINE; , DAYANANDA, P. & Quo and the Development of the Use of Regulation
STAVROULA, S. 2007. An analytical review of the
factors stimulating smaller firms to export Implications
for policy-makers. International Marketing Review,
24, 735-770.
[52]. LEONIDOU, C. L. 2004. An analysis of the barriers
hindering small business export development. Journal
of Small Business Management, 42, 279-302.
[53]. LEONIDOU, N., CONSTANTINOS; , LEONIDOU,
C., LEONIDAS;, COUDOUNARIS, D. & heterogeneity in learning by exporting. Journal of
HULTMAN, M. 2013. Value differences as
determinants of importers’ perceptions of exporters’
unethical behavior: The impact on relationship quality
and performance. International Business Review, 22,
156-173.
[54]. LI, L., QIAN, G. & QIAN, Z. 2013. Breadth and depth
of international diversification: interactions, trade.
Journal of General Management, 39, 3-25.
[55]. MADSEN, T., KOED;, MOEN, Ø. & Market Structure, Network Characteristics, and Entry
HAMMERVOLD, R. 2012. The role of independent
intermediaries: The case of small and medium-sized
exporters. International Business Review, 21, 535-546.
[56]. MADURA, J. 2012. International Financial
Management, South-Western Cengage Learning.
[57]. MANEV, M., IVAN; & STEVENSON, B.,
WILLIAM. 2001. Nationality, Cultural Distance, and
Expatriate Status: Effects on the Managerial Network
in a Multinational Enterprise. Journal of International
Business Studies, 32, 285-303.
[58]. MILES, B., MATTHEW; & HUBERMAN, A.,
MICHAEL. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis An
expanded sourcebook, California, London, Greater
Kailash., Sage Publications Inc.
IJISRT21OCT453 www.ijisrt.com
International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
[59]. ONETTI, A., ZUCCHELLA, A., JONES, M. &
MCDOUGALL-COVIN, P. 2012. Internationalization,
innovation and entrepreneurship: business models for
new technology-based firms. Journal of Management
and Governance, 16 337-368.
[60]. PATTON, Q., MICHAEL. 1990. Oualitative
Evaluation and Research Methods, California, US,
Sage, Thousand Oaks.
[61]. PETERSEN, B., PEDERSEN, T. & LYLES, A.,
MARJORIE. 2008. Closing Knowledge Gaps in
Foreign Markets. Journal of International Business
Studies, 39, 1097-1113.
[62]. PLA-BARBER, J. & ALEGRE, J. 2014. The role of
knowledge and learning in internationalization.
International Business Review, 23, 1-3.
[63]. POULIS, K., MO, Y. & POULIS, E. 2011. Domestic
firms competing with multinational enterprises: the
relevance of resource accessing alliance formations.
International Business Review, 21, 588-601.
[64]. POULIS, K. & POULIS, E. 2011. Promotional
channels of FMCG firms and tourism: A
standardisation/adaptation perspective. Euromed
Journal of Business, 6, 5-23.
[65]. PROFETA, A., BALLING, R., SCHOENE, V. &
WIRSIG, A. 2010. Protected Geographical Indications
and Designations of Origin: An Overview of the Status
(EC) 510/06 in Europe, With Special Consideration of
the German Situation. Journal of International Food &
Agribusiness Marketing, 22, 179-198.
[66]. REID, D., STAN. 1981. The Decision-Maker and
Export Entry and Expansion. Journal of International
Business Studies, 12, 101-112.
[67]. SALOMON, R. & JIN, B. 2008. Does knowledge spill
to leaders or laggards? Exploring industry
International Business Studies, 39, 132–150.
[68]. SANCHEZ, M., CAROL; & MCKINLEY, W. 1995.
The effect of product regulation on business global
competitiveness: A contingency approach.
Management International Review, 35, 293-305.
[69]. SARKAR, M., B.; , CAVUSGIL, S., TAMER; &
AULAKH, S., PREET. 1999. International Expansion
of Telecommunication Carriers: The Influence of
Imperfections. Journal of International Business
Studies, 30, 361-381.
[70]. SHINKLE, A., GEORGE; & KRIAUCIUNAS, P.,
ALDAS. 2010. Institutions, size and age in transition
economies: Implications for export growth. Journal of
International Business Studies 41, 267–286.
[71]. STYLE, C. & AMBLER, T. 1994. "Successful Export
Practice: The UK Experience". International
Marketing Review, 11, 23-47.
[72]. TONG, W., TONY;, ALESSANDRI, T., REUER, J. &
CHINTAKANANDA, A. 2008. How Much Does
Country Matter? An Analysis of Firms' Growth
Options. Journal of International Business Studies, 39,
387-405.
424
Volume 6, Issue 10, October – 2021 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165
[73]. TUAN, M., LE. 2003. Value Added Taxation:
Mechanism, Design, and Policy Issues. Paper
prepared for the World Bank course on Practical
Issues of Tax Policy in Developing Countries
Washington D.C: World Bank.
[74]. VERHOEF, C., PETER;, NIJSSEN, J., EDWIN; &
SLOOT, M., LAURENS. 2000. Strategic reactions of
national brand manufacturers towards private labels:
An empirical study in The Netherlands. European
Journal of Marketing, 36, 1309-1326.
[75]. WELCH, C., MARSCHAN-PIEKKARI, R.,
PENTTINEN, H. & TAHVANAINEN, M. 2002.
Corporate elites as informants in qualitative
international business research. International Business
Review, 11, 611-628.
[76]. WELCH, S., LAWRENCE, LUOSTARINEN, K.,
REIJO. 1993. Inward-Outward Connections in
Internationalization. Journal of International
Marketing, 1, 44-56.
[77]. WHITELOCK, J. 2002. Theories of
internationalisation and their impact on market entry.
International Marketing Review, 19, 342-347.
[78]. YIN, K., ROBERT. 2009. Case study research:
Design and methods, Sage publication Inc.

IJISRT21OCT453 www.ijisrt.com 425